From: mikecombs@nospam.com_chg_nospam_2_ti.retro.com   
      
   "Fred J. McCall"  wrote in message   
   news:i68801pgb180c7bfu07j26vqmmfu0ocjja@4ax.com...   
   >   
   > Except most of our industrial processes work better in the presence of   
   > at least some gravity.  It makes a lot of things a lot more   
   > convenient.   
      
   For any industrial process where some gravity is advantageous, don't forget   
   that a suitable substitute can be arranged for in an orbital facility by   
   having a portion of it rotate.  On the other hand, if there are any   
   industrial processes where 0-G was where the advantage lay, one could have   
   that too; but couldn't have it on the lunar surface.   
      
   But the latter is not the primary argument for processing in HEO over the   
   lunar surface.  The primary arguments are the gravity well issues, and the   
   continuous availability of sunlight in a sufficiently-high orbit.  For as   
   long as a portion of an orbital facility can be made to rotate, there's   
   simply no reason to abandon these significant advantages just because we   
   need some material to settle or separate.   
      
   > I'd think you just chuck it into a crater from on high and then go   
   > strip mine it out.  No 'landing it' necessary.  Little to no   
   > atmosphere means you can use solar furnaces for smelting.   
      
   For 2 weeks out of every 4.  In HEO, those solar furnaces can run 24/7.  And   
   can be made arbitrarily large.   
      
      
   --   
      
      
   Regards,   
   Mike Combs   
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------   
   Member of the National Non-sequitur Society.  We may not make   
   much sense, but we do like pizza.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)